MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE PLANNING APPLICATIONS ...

PLANNING APPLICATIONSProtection Area (SPA) and the relevant Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)then the application shall be refused for the following reason:i) The Planning Authority, following an appropriateassessment and in the light of availableinformation and the representations of EnglishNature, is unable to satisfy itself that the proposal(in combination with other projects) would nothave an adverse effect on the integrity of theThames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area(SPA) and the relevant Site of Special ScientificInterest (SSSI). In this respect, significantconcerns remain with regard to adverse effect onthe integrity of the Special Protection Area in thatthere is likely to be an increase in dog walking,general recreational use and damage to the habitatand the protection of protected species within theprotected areas. Accordingly, since the planningauthority is not satisfied that Regulation 62 of theConservation of Habitats and Species Regulations2010 (The Habitats Regulation) applies in thiscase, it must refuse permission in accordancewith Regulation 61 (5) of the Habitats Regulationsand Article 6 (3) of Directive 92/43/EE. For thesame reasons the proposal conflicts with PoliciesRE10 and RE11 of the Surrey Heath Local Plan2000 (as saved) and Policy NRM6 of the SouthEast Plan 2009.In the event that a satisfactory legal agreement is not completed to offset theimpact of the development in line with the Council's Tariff Scheme by 18thApril 2011 (the application expiry date), then the application shall be refusedfor the following reason:ii)In the absence of a completed legal agreementunder section 106 of the Town and CountryPlanning Act 1990, the applicant has failed tocomply with Policy G3 of the Surrey Heath LocalPlan 2000 (AS SAVED) and Policy CC7 of theSouth East Plan 2009 in relation to the provision ofinfrastructure contributions towards transport,libraries, community facilities and recycling, inaccordance with the requirements of the SurreyHeath Borough Councils ‘Planning Obligationsand Infrastructure Provision’ Tariff Scheme andCircular 05/2005. The proposal would thereforecontribute to unacceptable additional pressure onlocal infrastructure to the detriment of the locality.Note 1:The officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Alan Whittartand seconded by Councillor Gret Woodason.MINUTES\PLANAPPS\4Apr113

PLANNING APPLICATIONSNote 2:In accordance with Part 4 Section D paragraph 18 of the Constitution, thefollowing councillors voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation as setout above: Councillors Ian Cullen, Surinder Gandhum, David Hamilton,Beverley Harding, Edward Hawkins, Paul Ilnicki, Bruce Mansell, MargaretMoher, Ken Pedder, Audrey Roxburgh, Stewart Stevenson, DavidWhitcroft, Alan Whittart and Gret Woodason.134/PA Application - 2011/0044 - Priests House, 105 - 111 Portsmouth Road,FrimleyThe application was for the change of use of existing Church Hall (D1) toResidential Dwelling House (C3) with associated alterations and erection ofa detached double garage with habitable accommodation above.Some Members were concerned about the existing parking on Grove CrossRoad at the point of access to the site but the Committee was advised thatthe County Highways Authority would alter the road markings to precludeparking at this area.Clarification was sought as to why an application for listed building consenthad not been made. Members were advised that the wording contained inthe informative would be clarified for the benefit of the applicant.Resolved that application 2011/0044 be approved subject to:1. the completion of a suitable obligation to secure thefollowing:a financial contribution of £3,500 to mitigate theimpact of the development on the Thames BasinHeath Special Protection Area, in accordance with theCouncils Interim Avoidance Strategya financial contribution of £7,676.24 to mitigate theimpact of the development on local infrastructure, inaccordance with the Surrey Tariff Scheme; and2. conditions as set out in the Head of Planning Developmentand Homes’ report.In the event that a satisfactory obligation has not been completed by the 8thApril 2011, the Head of Planning, Development and Homes be authorised torefuse the application for the following reasons:1. The Planning Authority, following an AppropriateAssessment and in the light of available information and therepresentations of Natural England, is unable to satisfyitself that the proposal (in combination with other projects)would not have an adverse effect on the integrity of theThames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA) and therelevant Site of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI). In thisrespect, significant concerns remain with regard to adverseeffect on the integrity of the Special Protection Area in thatthere is likely to be an increase in dog walking, generalMINUTES\PLANAPPS\4Apr114

PLANNING APPLICATIONSrecreational use and damage to the habitat and theprotection of protected species within the protected areas.Accordingly, since the planning authority is not satisfiedthat Regulation 62 of the Conservation of Habitats andSpecies Regulation 2010 (The Habitats Regulation) appliesin this case, it must refuse permission in accordance withRegulation 61 (5) of the Habitats Regulations and Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EE. For the same reasons the proposalconflicts with guidance contained in Planning PolicyStatement 9 (Biodiversity and Geological Conservation).2. In the absence of a completed legal agreement undersection 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, theapplicant has failed to comply with Policy G3 of the SurreyHeath Local Plan 2000 (as saved) and Policy CC7 of theSouth East Plan 2009 in relation to the provision ofinfrastructure contributions towards, transport, libraries,equipped playspace, community facilities, environmentalimprovements and recycling, in accordance with therequirements of Surrey Heath Borough Councils ‘PlanningInfrastructure Contributions’ Scheme.Note 1:The recommendation was proposed by Councillor David Hamilton andseconded by Councillor Stewart Stevenson.Note 2:In accordance with Part 4 Section D paragraph 18 of the Constitution, thefollowing councillors voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation as setout above: Councillors Ian Cullen, Surinder Gandhum, David Hamilton,Beverley Harding, Edward Hawkins, Paul Ilnicki, Bruce Mansell, MargaretMoher, Ken Pedder, Audrey Roxburgh, Stewart Stevenson, DavidWhitcroft, Alan Whittart and Gret Woodason.135/PA Application 2011/0065 – 165 Guildford Road, LightwaterThe application was for the conversion of the existing building from a retailunit (Class A1) with residential flat over into a dwelling house (Class C3)and erection of a part two storey part single storey rear extension withassociated alterations and erection of an attached single storey side garagefollowing part demolition of existing 2 storey rear structure and detachedgarage.Members were advised that the parish council had raised no objection tothe proposal.Resolved that application 2011/0065 be approved subject toconditions as set out in the Head of Planning Development andHomes’ report.Note 1:The officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor AudreyRoxburgh and seconded by Councillor Gret Woodason.MINUTES\PLANAPPS\4Apr115

PLANNING APPLICATIONSNote 2:In accordance with Part 4 Section D paragraph 18 of the Constitution, thefollowing councillors voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation as setout above: Councillors Ian Cullen, Surinder Gandhum, David Hamilton,Beverley Harding, Edward Hawkins, Paul Ilnicki, Bruce Mansell, MargaretMoher, Ken Pedder, Audrey Roxburgh, Stewart Stevenson, DavidWhitcroft, Alan Whittart and Gret Woodason.136/PA Application 2010/0087 – Land at Lyon Way, FrimleyThe application was for the application for the continued use of existing carpark for 167 vehicles for a temporary period until 8th February 2014.Resolved that application 2010/0087 be approved subject toconditions as set out in the Head of Planning Development andHomes report.Note 1:The officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor David Whitcroftand seconded by Councillor Margaret Moher.Note 2:In accordance with Part 4 Section D paragraph 18 of the Constitution, thefollowing councillors voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation as setout above: Councillors Ian Cullen, Surinder Gandhum, David Hamilton,Beverley Harding, Edward Hawkins, Paul Ilnicki, Bruce Mansell, MargaretMoher, Ken Pedder, Audrey Roxburgh, Stewart Stevenson, DavidWhitcroft, Alan Whittart and Gret Woodason.137/PA Application 2011/0089 – The Folds, Church Lane, BisleyThe application was for the conversion of the existing dwelling house toform one 3 bedroom and one 2 bedroom dwelling house following erectionof a two storey rear extension.Members were advised that the applicant had requested that theapplication be withdrawn.Resolved that application 2011/0089 be withdrawn as requested bythe applicant.138/PA Application 2011/0124 – First Lightwater Scout Headquarter, TheAvenue, Lightwater.The application was for the erection of a front extension to existinggarage/store building.Members were advised that Surrey Wildlife Trust had raised no objection tothe proposal. However, the Trust had produced an informative regardingbats.‘Bats may be found within the surrounding wooded area and as such theapplicant should have due regard for their responsibilities with regard toMINUTES\PLANAPPS\4Apr116

PLANNING APPLICATIONSbats as species legally protected under The Conservation of Species andHabitats Regulations 2010 and under the 1981 Wildlife and CountrysideAct, Section 9, Schedule 5. Works affecting the roof structure of the existingbuilding should be carried out by hand to ensure any bats will not beharmed and if a bat is seen, work should cease immediately and advicesought from Natural England or a qualified bat specialist.’Resolved that application 2011/0124 be approved subject toconditions as set out in the Head of Planning Development andHomes’ report.Note 1:In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct Councillor SurinderGandhum declared a personal interest as he was a councillor for the ParishCouncil.Note 2:The officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Ian Cullen andseconded by Councillor Gret Woodason.Note 3:In accordance with Part 4 Section D paragraph 18 of the Constitution, thefollowing councillors voted in favour of the officer’s recommendation as setout above: Councillors Ian Cullen, Surinder Gandhum, David Hamilton,Beverley Harding, Edward Hawkins, Paul Ilnicki, Bruce Mansell, MargaretMoher, Ken Pedder, Audrey Roxburgh, Stewart Stevenson, DavidWhitcroft, Alan Whittart and Gret Woodason.ChairmanMINUTES\PLANAPPS\4Apr117